Performance of the resurfaced hip. Part 1: The influence of the prosthesis size and positioning on the remodelling and fracture of the femoral neck

Abstract Hip resurfacing is an established treatment for osteoarthritis in young active patients. Failure modes include femoral neck fracture and prosthesis loosening, which may be associated with medium-term bone adaptation, including femoral neck narrowing and densification around the prosthesis stem. Finite element modelling was used to indicate the effects of prosthesis sizing and positioning on the bone remodelling and fracture strength under a range of normal and traumatic loads, with the aim of understanding these failure modes better. The simulations predicted increased superior femoral neck stress shielding in young patients with small prostheses, which required shortening of the femoral neck to give an acceptable implant—bone interface. However, with a larger prosthesis, natural femoral head centre recreation in the implanted state was possible; therefore stress shielding was restricted to the prosthesis interior, and its extent was less sensitive to prosthesis orientation. With valgus orientation, the implanted neck strength was, at worst, within 3 per cent of its intact strength. The study suggests that femoral neck narrowing may be linked to a reduction in the horizontal femoral offset, occurring if the prosthesis is excessively undersized. As such, hip resurfacing should aim to reproduce the natural femoral head centre, and, for valgus prosthesis orientation, to avoid femoral neck fracture.

[1]  T. Santner,et al.  Hip resurfacing increases bone strains associated with short‐term femoral neck fracture , 2009, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[2]  S. Kurtz,et al.  Role of surgical position on interface stress and initial bone remodeling stimulus around hip resurfacing arthroplasty. , 2009, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[3]  S. Gupta,et al.  A numerical study of failure mechanisms in the cemented resurfaced femur: Effects of interface characteristics and bone remodelling , 2009, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part H, Journal of engineering in medicine.

[4]  R. Meek,et al.  Femoral neck narrowing after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing. , 2008, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[5]  R Zdero,et al.  Femoral neck fracture following hip resurfacing: the effect of alignment of the femoral component. , 2008, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[6]  Michael M Morlock,et al.  Modes of implant failure after hip resurfacing: morphological and wear analysis of 267 retrieval specimens. , 2008, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[7]  D J Beard,et al.  The five-year results of the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing arthroplasty: an independent series. , 2008, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[8]  M. Berend,et al.  Metal-metal hip resurfacing: solution to a nonexistent problem. , 2007, Orthopedics.

[9]  Mark Taylor,et al.  Investigation into the effect of varus-valgus orientation on load transfer in the resurfaced femoral head: a multi-femur finite element analysis. , 2007, Clinical biomechanics.

[10]  C. Hing,et al.  Narrowing of the neck in resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip: a radiological study. , 2007, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[11]  M Viceconti,et al.  Changes in femur stress after hip resurfacing arthroplasty: response to physiological loads. , 2007, Clinical biomechanics.

[12]  I A J Radcliffe,et al.  Investigation into the affect of cementing techniques on load transfer in the resurfaced femoral head: a multi-femur finite element analysis. , 2007, Clinical biomechanics.

[13]  D. Bartel,et al.  Surgical Variables Affect the Mechanics of a Hip Resurfacing System , 2006, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[14]  S M Kurtz,et al.  Biomechanics of the Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty. , 2006, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[15]  Mark Taylor,et al.  Bone remodelling inside a cemented resurfaced femoral head. , 2006, Clinical biomechanics.

[16]  S J Eastaugh-Waring,et al.  Treatment of the young active patient with osteoarthritis of the hip. A five- to seven-year comparison of hybrid total hip arthroplasty and metal-on-metal resurfacing. , 2006, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[17]  M Taylor,et al.  Finite element analysis of the resurfaced femoral head. , 2006, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part H, Journal of engineering in medicine.

[18]  S. Maubach,et al.  Lessons learned from early clinical experience and results of 300 ASR® hip resurfacing implantations , 2006, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part H, Journal of engineering in medicine.

[19]  D. Back,et al.  Femoral neck fractures following Birmingham hip resurfacing: a national review of 50 cases. , 2005, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[20]  D W Murray,et al.  Osteonecrosis in retrieved femoral heads after failed resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip. , 2005, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[21]  P B Pynsent,et al.  Birmingham hip resurfacing arthroplasty. A minimum follow-up of five years. , 2005, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[22]  P. Campbell,et al.  Metal-on-metal surface arthroplasty with a cemented femoral component: a 7-10 year follow-up study. , 2004, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[23]  H. Amstutz,et al.  Orientation of the femoral component in surface arthroplasty of the hip. A biomechanical and clinical analysis. , 2004, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[24]  H. Amstutz,et al.  Fracture of the neck of the femur after surface arthroplasty of the hip. , 2004, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[25]  Z. Jin,et al.  Contact mechanics analysis of metal-on-metal hip resurfacing prostheses , 2004, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part H, Journal of engineering in medicine.

[26]  T. Keaveny,et al.  Trabecular bone modulus-density relationships depend on anatomic site. , 2003, Journal of biomechanics.

[27]  J. O'Connor,et al.  Strain distribution within the human femur due to physiological and simplified loading: Finite element analysis using the muscle standardized femur model , 2003, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers. Part H, Journal of engineering in medicine.

[28]  G. Bergmann,et al.  Hip contact forces and gait patterns from routine activities. , 2001, Journal of biomechanics.

[29]  M Honl,et al.  Duration and frequency of every day activities in total hip patients. , 2001, Journal of biomechanics.

[30]  N Shiba,et al.  Biomechanical study of the resurfacing hip arthroplasty: finite element analysis of the femoral component. , 2000, The Journal of arthroplasty.

[31]  J H Keyak,et al.  Prediction of femoral fracture load using finite element models: an examination of stress- and strain-based failure theories. , 2000, Journal of biomechanics.

[32]  F. Dorey,et al.  Evolution and future of surface replacement of the hip , 1998, Journal of orthopaedic science : official journal of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association.

[33]  P. Benum,et al.  In vivo measurements show tensile axial strain in the proximal lateral aspect of the human femur , 1997, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[34]  H. Skinner,et al.  Prediction of femoral fracture load using automated finite element modeling. , 1997, Journal of biomechanics.

[35]  P. Pynsent,et al.  Metal on Metal Surface Replacement of the Hip: Experience of the McMinn Prosthesis , 1996, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[36]  A. Yettram,et al.  Stress and strain distribution within the intact femur: compression or bending? , 1996, Medical engineering & physics.

[37]  K. An,et al.  Effect of femoral offset on range of motion and abductor muscle strength after total hip arthroplasty. , 1995, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[38]  D R Sumner,et al.  Adaptive bone remodeling around bonded noncemented total hip arthroplasty: A comparison between animal experiments and computer simulation , 1993, Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society.

[39]  W. Hayes,et al.  Fracture prediction for the proximal femur using finite element models: Part I--Linear analysis. , 1991, Journal of biomechanical engineering.

[40]  W C Hayes,et al.  The use of quantitative computed tomography to estimate risk of fracture of the hip from falls. , 1990, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[41]  R. Crowninshield,et al.  Reconstruction of the hip. A mathematical approach to determine optimum geometric relationships. , 1979, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[42]  John Charnley,et al.  Low Friction Arthroplasty of the Hip: Theory and Practice , 1978 .

[43]  M. Freeman Some anatomical and mechanical considerations relevant to the surface replacement of the femoral head. , 1978, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[44]  H. Amstutz,et al.  Total hip articular replacement by internal eccentric shells: the "tharies" approach to total surface replacement arthroplasty. , 1977, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[45]  Aaron K. Schachter,et al.  Surface replacement arthroplasty of the hip. , 2009, Bulletin of the NYU hospital for joint diseases.

[46]  Marco Viceconti,et al.  Subject-specific finite element models implementing a maximum principal strain criterion are able to estimate failure risk and fracture location on human femurs tested in vitro. , 2008, Journal of biomechanics.

[47]  Marco Viceconti,et al.  In vitro replication of spontaneous fractures of the proximal human femur. , 2007, Journal of biomechanics.

[48]  W. Taylor,et al.  Physiologically based boundary conditions in finite element modelling. , 2007, Journal of biomechanics.

[49]  P. Campbell,et al.  Notching of the femoral neck during resurfacing arthroplasty of the hip: a vascular study. , 2006, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[50]  M. Silva,et al.  The biomechanical results of total hip resurfacing arthroplasty. , 2004, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[51]  G. Niebur,et al.  Comparison of the elastic and yield properties of human femoral trabecular and cortical bone tissue. , 2004, Journal of biomechanics.

[52]  R. Huiskes,et al.  A clinical, radiological and biomechanical study of the TARA hip prosthesis , 2004, Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery.

[53]  P. Campbell,et al.  Metal-on-metal hybrid surface arthroplasty: two to six-year follow-up study. , 2004, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[54]  S. Ohashi,et al.  Prediction of strength and fracture location of the proximal femur by a CT-based nonlinear finite element method - Effect of load direction on hip fracture load and fracture site - , 2002 .

[55]  W. Hayes,et al.  Fracture prediction for the proximal femur using finite element models: Part II--Nonlinear analysis. , 1991, Journal of biomechanical engineering.

[56]  Hwj Rik Huiskes,et al.  The effect of adaptive bone remodeling threshold levels on resorption around noncemented hip stems. , 1991 .

[57]  E Y Chao,et al.  A survey of finite element analysis in orthopedic biomechanics: the first decade. , 1983, Journal of biomechanics.

[58]  John Charnley,et al.  Low Friction Arthroplasty of the Hip , 1979 .

[59]  Hertz On the Contact of Elastic Solids , 1882 .